Redesigns Done Right at the ITC: Federal Circuit Affirms ITC Determination of Noninfringement of Redesigned Products

In Bissell, Inc. v. International Trade Commission, the Federal Circuit affirmed the ITC’s Final Determination of infringement of Tineco’s original accused products and noninfringement by its redesigned devices.

Bissell filed a complaint at the ITC asserting Tineco infringed Bissel’s patents related to a surface cleaning apparatus. The Commission found that Tineco’s original products infringed and barred their importation. The Commission found that Tineco’s redesigned products, however, did not infringe the claims because the battery circuit in the redesigned product did not remain disabled throughout the cleaning cycle. Bissell appealed, arguing that the Commission relied on an implicit error in claim construction and failed to apply the insubstantial differences test. Tineco cross-appealed, asserting the Commission erred in finding Bissel’s domestic industry products satisfied the battery circuit limitations by relying on expert testimony that rested on evidence not submitted at trial.

On appeal, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Commissions’ determination of noninfringement of the redesigned products, finding that the Commission properly relied on the plain and ordinary meaning of the battery circuit limitations. The Federal Circuit also rejected Tineco’s cross-appeal arguments, clarifying that under Federal Rule of Evidence 703, an expert may rely on evidence that experts in the field would reasonably rely on, even if not in evidence. The Court also rejected Tineco’s arguments that the Commission lacked substantial evidence to find infringement by Tineco’s original accused products.